The Emergence of Homo sapiens in South Asia: The Central ...beta.humanbiologyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Volume… · The type specimen of Homo heidelbergensis is Mauer

Human Biology Review (ISSN 2277 4424) 2 (2) 2013

©Human Biology Review Original scientific paper (Sankhyan pp.136-152)

Revised and Accepted on April 1, 2013

136

The Emergence of Homo sapiens in South Asia: The Central Narmada

Valley as Witness

Anek R. Sankhyan

Dr. Anek R. Sankhyan, Ex- Sr. Anthropologist (Physical), Anthropological Survey of India, Kolkata,

President, ‘Palaeo Research Society’, Ghumarwin-174021 (H.P.), India: www.palaeoresearchsociety.com,

E-mail:[email protected]

ABSTRACT

The emergence of anatomically modern Homo sapiens in South Asia is hotly debated due to a great

gap in fossil record. A solitary partial cranium from Hathnora dated around 250 Kya is debated and

conveniently interpreted as “evolved” Homo erectus or “archaic” Homo sapiens or Homo

heidelbergensis or even Homo indet. Cranial fossils of Pre-Toba or post- Toba anatomically modern

Homo sapiens are unknown barring the very late 30 Kya modern human remains from Sri Lanka. The

present paper reviews the scenario of human evolution in South Asia with special reference to the

cranial and recent postcranial fossil findings by the author in association with the archaeological

evidences from Central Narmada valley. It is concluded that the Narmada fossils and archaeological

findings support the presence of three hominins- two ‘archaic’ and one ‘early modern’. The Mode 2

Acheulian hominin represented by the calvarium and the femur was a ‘large-bodied’ species akin to

Homo heidelbergensis. It appeared first in the Central Narmada valley and was followed by a ‘small-

bodied’ Mode 3 archaic type represented by two clavicles and the 9th rib, provisionally named here as

Homo narmadensis. It likely continued and attained anatomical and behavioural modernity in South

Asia as attested by the humerus and bone artifacts, and diversified to various short-bodied indigenous

populations of South Asia supported by the genomic evidences.

KEYWORDS: Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo sapiens, Homo narmadensis, Cranial

and postcranial hominin fossils, Bone artifacts

INTRODUCTION

Three pivotal issues confront palaeoanthropologists worldwide: (1) The Last Common

Ancestor of the Chimpanzee-Hominids, (2) the Homo erectus-Homo sapiens Interface, and

(3) the emergence of modern Homo sapiens. Indian palaeoanthropology can contribute

potentially for the understanding of these issues if Indian evidences are interpreted on their

own merits without preconceived views. Though there are a number of notable archaeologists

and mammalian palaeontologists in India, but she lacks practicing palaeoanthropologists to

defend and place Indian hominoid and hominid evidence on their merit.

Here, I shall focus on the second and the third aspects, and only touch upon the first

dealt with in greater detail in various publications (Sankhyan, 1988, 1990, 2007). The hunt

for the purported ‘chimpanzee-human’ last common ancestor (LCA) in African fossil records

has so far proved futile. Numerous fossils collected from all over the Old World reveal a

peculiar distribution pattern of the Late Miocene hominoids and Plio-Pleistocene hominids.

http://www.palaeoresearchsociety.com/

mailto:[email protected]

Human Biology Review (ISSN 2277 4424) 2(2) 2013 : Sankhyan (2013) pp 136-152

137

While African continent is rich or the only source of Early Miocene fossil apes between 14 to

20 Million years ago (Mya), it has demonstrated meager or fragmentary evidences of the

Middle to late Miocene hominoids between 13 to 7 Mya, a period crucial for the

differentiation of the ‘LCA’. This period both in Asia and Eurasia has demonstrated rich

occurrences and diversity of the hominoids, who essentially exhibit a more morphological

affinity between the Southeast Orangutan and the Plio-Pleistocene African hominids

(Schwartz, 1987; Grehan & Schwartz, 2009; Sankhyan, 1988, 2007); the focus has shifted to

Asia (Dennell and Roebroeks, 2005).

The Homo erectus- Homo sapiens Transition or H. heidelbergensis: When and Where?

Archaic hominin morphology fairly goes in line with Palaeolithic technological development

in the Old World. Large Flake Acheulian handaxe-cleaver technology of Homo erectus was a

great advance over the crude Olduwan choppers of Homo habilis. This made Homo erectus a

versatile hunter and a global trotter successfully adaptive to new environmental opportunities

expanding and populated tropical and subtropical zones as far as the South East Asia. This

migration could have not been possible without acquiring greater intelligence and better

hunting skills and use of fire. This territorial expansion most likely began around 1.8-1.7

million years ago and coincides with progressively cooling climate of Europe and Asia. By

half a million years ago, some Homo erectus populations were able to move into the

seasonally cold temperate zones of Asia and Europe. Surprisingly, however, Homo erectus

remained little changed anatomically until about 800 Kya, thereafter his brain expanded and

approached modern humans. The robust features like the sagittal ridge and torus angularis in

Homo erectus likely became vestigial pleisiomorphies simply retained in some later hominins

but vanished in other during evolution to Homo sapiens.

The transition from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens probably started as early as 400

Kya and 250 Kya. This was the later Middle Pleistocene in which we see a trend in brain

expansion and refinement in stone tool technologies. There are many morphologically

intermediate specimens discovered all over the Old World, which indicate continuity between

late Homo erectus and early Homo sapiens. Such intermediates are called “archaic” Homo

sapiens or also known by a new species, Homo heidelbergensis (Rightmire, 1998).

The type specimen of Homo heidelbergensis is Mauer 1, discovered in 1907 in the

Mauer sand pits near Heidelberg, Germany and most likely dates back to 500 Kya. Another is

The Emergence of Homo sapiens in South Asia: Sankhyan (2013) pp 136-152

138

600 Kya Bodo cranium with 1100cc brain volume which was discovered in 1976 at Bodo in

the Middle Awash Valley of Ethiopia. The Arago cave cranium (Tautavel) in the eastern

Pyrenees Mountains, France, has 1166cc brain volume and also appears to be Homo

heidelbergensis. The Petralona 1 cranium discovered in 1960 in Greece, dated to be around

400-300 Kya, originally attributed to Homo neanderthalensis, and later classified as Homo

erectus, is now attributed to Homo heidelbergensis specimens. It has a large double-arched

brow ridge, massive face and 1220 cc brain volume. There are other important specimens

like, Kabwe, Steinheim and Atapuerca, including the Dali cranium of China, all attributed to

Homo heidelbergensis. The Kabwe Man from Broken Hill in Zambia discovered in 1921 and

dated to 200-125 Kya is often cited as the example of typical Homo heidelbergensis in Asia.

It is a very heavy-boned complete cranium with large brow ridges and a receding forehead;

the brain size equals to that of modern humans.

The type specimen Mauer 1 shows a host of both primitive and derived features that

have been accepted as proof of ancestry to the Neanderthal line. In general, Homo

heidelbergensis specimens show a continuation of evolutionary trends that occurred in the

Lower Pleistocene into the Middle Pleistocene. Along with changes in robusticity of cranial

and dental features, there is a marked increase in brain size from Homo erectus to Homo

heidelbergensis. The striking morphological features of these are enlarged brain, divided or

curved brow ridges unlike a continuous rim of the Homo erectus of China and Java. It also

lacks the sagittal midline thickening of the braincase, occipital torus and thickened ear region

and mandibles of Homo erectus. Its skull shows moderate development with receding

foreheads lacking in Java Homo erectus compared to the Peking man. The difference is also

visible in the relatively larger brain volume; Homo erectus has 800-1000cc whereas Homo

heidelbergensis had 1200cc. The skull is conspicuously larger; it is longer and low-shaped

with relatively rounded braincase; the brow ridge was large but discontinuous, flatter face

without chin; its skeleton and teeth are usually smaller compared to Homo erectus but larger

than in modern humans.

Homo heidelbergensis is known to have lived from at least 600 Kya in Africa and

Europe to maybe as late as 250 Kya in some areas. They routinely butchered large animals

with Acheulian Lanceolate hand axes, wooden spears, and Mousterian stone tools. Homo

heidelbergensis was an accomplished tool-maker and organized skillful hunter, and almost

certainly used fire and therefore was the first early human species to live in colder climates.

His short and wide body is likely an adaptation for conserving heat.


139

The skull of Homo heidelbergensis is intermediate between Homo erectus and the

anatomically modern Homo sapiens. There is no clear dividing line between late Homo

erectus and Homo heidelbergensis; so many fossils between 500- 200 Kya make it difficult to

pick up one as direct ancestor of Homo sapiens. DNA reveals that Neanderthal and Homo

sapiens shared a common ancestor about 400 Kya in Homo heidelbergensis which diverged

to Homo neanderthalensis in Europe and to Homo sapiens in Africa, including perhaps the

Denisovans in Asia.

Emergence of Modern Homo sapiens

Compared to the Neanderthals and other late archaic humans, modern humans

generally have more delicate skeletons with less massive musculature, the skulls more

rounded and the brow ridges less protruding, lacking the occipital buns of the Neanderthal

skulls; the foreheads higher, faces smaller with pointed chins. With such features, the Cro-

Magnon are the first fossils (clearly modern humans) which emerged around 27 Kya in a

rock shelter near Les Eyzies in southwestern France. They looked like modern Europeans,

the males taller (1.6-1.8 m.) than Neanderthals, brains larger up to 1590 cm3, larger than

today’s people; the foreheads higher and faces broad with pointed chins.

But how old are the earliest modern humans? When and where did the “archaic”

Homo sapiens =Homo heidelbergensis evolve to anatomically modern Homo sapiens, is still

hotly debated. As for the Homo erectus-Homo heidelbergensis transition, the first emergence

of modern humans is again generally considered to be an African event probably between

200-150 Kya in the Middle Palaeolithic. The Idaltu or Omo 1 man in Ethiopia is considered

to be the first modern Homo sapiens dating around 160 Kya, but Lee and Wolpoff (2007)

contested it in favour of the Herto Man (around 160 Kya) from the Middle Awash area of

Ethiopia as the better ancestor. Herto had modern rounded skull with archaic large brow

ridges. Somewhat more advanced transitional forms have been found at Laetoli in Tanzania

about 120 Kya and in South Africa about 115 Kya indicating southward expansion of

modern Homo sapiens within African continent. Around 100 Kya modern Homo sapiens had

expanded their range into Southwest Asia (Israel). But, there is no reliable evidence of

modern humans elsewhere in the Old World until 60-40 Kya.

The colonization of the Old World by the African Homo sapiens by replacing the

indigenous regional late Homo erectus and Homo heidelbergensis populations is called


140

‘Single Origin’ or “African Eve” theory or “Noah’s ark” model. The ‘Out of Africa’ theory

clashed for long with the “Regional Continuity” or ‘Multiregional’ theory, which postulates

that modern Homo sapiens evolved from the regionally differentiated populations of late

Homo erectus or Homo heidelbergensis = archaic Homo sapiens. Currently,

palaeoanthropologists agree on partial ‘assimilation’ which does not preclude some

multiregional evolution and some admixture of the migrant modern Homo sapiens with the

existing regional archaic populations. This has been very recently re-asserted by Alan

Templeton (2012) who concluded:

“Gene flow is a genetic interchange between local populations within a species. ….These studies also

revealed that when anatomically modern humans first expanded out of sub-Saharan Africa starting

130 000 years ago, they interbred at low levels with the archaic Eurasian populations that they

encountered, thereby falsifying the hypothesis that anatomically modern humans completely replaced

genetically the archaic populations that they encountered. This conclusion has been confirmed by

direct studies on ancient DNA and fossils.”

DNA suggests a genetic homogeneity among all present-day people of the world

belonging to a single L3 lineage of relatively recent evolution. Genetic differences among

them occurred as smaller groups of people moved into new environments, such as skin

colour, nose form, and the ability to breathe more efficiently at high altitudes. These adaptive

traits are considered as a very small component of the Homo sapiens genome. Recent DNA

evidence also suggests that several haplotypes of Neanderthal origin are present among all

non-African populations and Denisova hominins, and may have contributed up to 6% of their

genome to present-day humans. We are yet to document through fossils the 60-70 Kya L3

mtDNA lineages in South Asia.

The Status of Narmada Prehistoric Men

The recent human fossil evidences from the Central Narmada valley (Sankhyan et al.,

2012a,b) have confirmed the presence of three hominins in Pleistocene, two archaic and one

early modern (Figures 1 to 4). Among the two archaic types, one was a ‘large-bodied’

hominin represented by the partial skull cap (calvarium) and a recent femur fossil, and the

other was a ‘short and stocky” pygmy-sized Homo sapiens represented by two clavicles

(collar bones) and a left 9th

rib. The third is an ‘early modern’ Homo sapiens represented by a

recent finding of the left humerus.


141

Figure 1. Map of a portion of the Central Narmada valley around Hathnora showing hominin yielding sites

marked with star (modified from Sankhyan et al., 2012b)

Figure 2. New fossils of the left humerus and the left femur shaft portions from Netankheri, Central Narmada

valley (Sankhyan et al., 2012b)

1. The ‘Large-bodied’ Narmada Hominin

The Narmada partial skull cap (calvarium) has been debated as late Homo erectus (Lumley

and Sonakia, 1985b; Dambricourt Malassie, 2009) or archaic Homo sapiens (Kennedy et al.,

1991; Kennedy, 2000, 2007). Cameron et al. (2004) have taken out Narmada calvarium from

the Homo erectus domain and included it in the Steinheim and Homo heidelbergensis and

considered it a European migrant to South Asia. The author (Sankhyan, 2005, 2007) re-

viewed the calvarium for metric and non-metric traits and noted its maximum metric

similarities with Petralona, followed in the decreasing order by La Ferrassie, the La Chapelle

Aux Saint, the Kabwe/Dali/Zkd 10 / Ngadong11/Sangiran17, the Ceprano and Steinheim.


142

But, Martinez & Arsuaga (1997) regarded the Petralona and other European forms grouped

under Neanderthals showing local affinities.

Figure 3A: Excavations conducted by the author and his team at U1 level of Hathnora hominin calvarium site

yielded in situ mandible of Elephas namadicus and other mega fauna including over a hundred ‘Large Flake

Acheulian’ handaxes, cleavers and chopping tools for the first time (Sankhyan et al., 2012b) Figure 3B:

Author’s revisit to Netankheri hominin locality in October 2012 yielded more Palaeolithic findings recovered in

situ from the humerus bed shown in Figure 4B (bottom left).

Figure 4: A. The fossils and archaeological findings of the ‘large-bodied’ Acheulian (Mode 2) Narmada

hominin provisionally named here Homo narmadensis. B. The ‘small-bodied’ Mode 3 Homo bamanensis and

‘early modern’ Homo sapiens (modified from Sankhyan et al. 2012b).

Overall, Narmada skull cap is classifiable gradistically with the “archaic” Homo

sapiens or Homo heidelbergensis or cladistically either Homo heidelbergensis (Athreya 2007)

or a distinct unknown species, Homo indet. The recent femur from Netankheri just 3 km

upstream from Hathnora shows a robust morphology of the ‘large-bodied’ hominin

intermediate between Homo erectus and the Homo neanderthalensis. Quite likely therefore

the Hathnora calvaria and the Netankheri femur are derived from the same hominin species

which was very akin to Homo heidelbergensis, if not a new species.


143

1. The ‘short and stocky’ Narmada archaic Hominin

The two clavicles and the 9th

rib are important for estimating the body dimensions of the

hominin (Sankhyan, 1997a, b, 2005, 2007; Sankhyan & Rao, 2007) useful in understanding

hominin adaptations. The clavicles yielded a fair estimate of the upper chest or breadth across

the shoulders as well as the antero-posterior depth of the thorax; the 9th

rib reflects the

maximum expanse of the lower thorax or the shape and size of the trunk. In addition, the

clavicle length also provides a fair estimate of the stature. The conoid indices of the Narmada

clavicles closely go with the mean value of modern humans or the lower value of the

Andaman pygmy, suggesting a modern type moderate chest depth and adapted to warm-

humid tropical climate. Its diaphyseal robusticity indicates body build and life styles or

occupations and ecological adaptations of the early hominins (Pearson, 2000). The midshaft

index further attests the same showing diaphyseal rounding touching the lower threshold of

Homo sapiens. The diaphyseal rounding shows interesting evolutionary trend from the

primitive platycleidy of Plio-Pleistocene hominids, the mesocleidy of the Neanderthals and

the eurycleidy of modern humans (Sankhyan, 1999b).

Population N CL/STR Andamanese [Females] Inference for Narmada Homo

Min. Mean Max Min Mean Max

Onge (Gupta et al. 1960) 7 CL 10.1 10.7 11.1 - 90.0 -

STR 146.8 149.6 151.9 125.8 130.0 123.2

Onge (Chatterjee 1956) 23 STR 129.1 139.0 147.1 115.0 116.9 119.2

Andamanese (Flower 1880) 18 CL 9.5 10.7 11.6 - 90.0 -

STR 130.2 137.5 148.1 123.3 115.7 114.9

Onge* female (R. Sahani, Personal Communication)

35 STR 130 137.99 142 - - -

Table 1: Estimation of the Stature of Narmada Homo based on the Clavicle length (CL) and Stature (STR) of

the Andaman Islanders by Unitary method. *Mean and range values of the biacromial diameter of female Onge

= 28 (30.14) 33 cm; CL=clavicle length, STR=stature

Employing various methods, the author achieved the varying stature estimates

ranging from 115 to 135 cm (Table 1). The maximum estimate tallies with the lower value of

the female Onge and the Greater Andamanese, both skeletal and living. Similarly, a value of

30.6 cm shoulder width estimated for Narmada right clavicle corresponds to the mean

biacromial diameter of female Onge with a narrow range of 29 – 33.5 cm (Chatterjee, 1956)

indicating that the Narmada hominin had body dimensions similar to those of Pygmy.


144

Given the above evidence there is definite presence of the ‘short and stocky’ archaic

hominin in Central Narmada valley that was different from the ‘large-bodied’ one. But, due

to no specific nomenclature it was often confused and neglected. The author therefore feels

the necessity of a formal nomen provisionally given here as Homo narmadensis who was the

potential carrier of the Mode 3 culture in South Asia and probably of the early Mode 4 as

well as that documented at Netankheri.

The Netankheri humerus was found in association with Middle Palaeolithic (Mode

3) tools and with bone implements found for the first time in Narmada valley. They are dark

in hue and possess evidence of fire treatment or charring besides dental marks on a few. Most

of the bone tools include humeral and femoral distal and mid shaft splits, but antler, scapular

and rib fragments are also used. They have the evidence of retouches on the working edge.

Typo-technologically they appear of late Mode 3 or early Mode 4; there are different types,

viz., a hand-held dagger, spatulas, scrapers, drills, awls, burins and blades. The associated

mixed later Middle Palaeolithic and early Upper Palaeolithic stone and the bone tools

indicate continuity and diverse technological skills and adaptations to the changing

sedimentary regime, found in early anatomically modern Homo sapiens.

The absolute dating of the Netankheri humerus is yet to be done. But, its location is

below the Youngest Toba Ash (YTA)which is datum of ~75 Kya located higher in the

overlying Baneta and Hirdepur formations in Narmada and its tributaries (Tiwari & Bhai,

1997). If that is true then the Netankheri humerus could be older to the YTA datum. The

fauna and archaeological findings also allow a date interval for the humerus between 80 and

70 Kya.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Thus, the known evidences indicate presence of two types of archaic hominins. An

early modern human lived in Narmada valley during Middle to early Late Pleistocene times

(~250 to 70 Kya). The “large-bodied” species (Homo heidelbergensis) was wide spread

during the Middle Pleistocene in the lower level (U1) of the Surajkund formation which

hunted mega mammals with typical Mode 2 Acheulian implements. A distinct change

occurred in the climate and ecology at the Mode 2 / Mode 3 transition visible in the faunal

content, which was not favourable for the Large Flake Acheulian hunter who consequently


145

migrated to other parts. Author’s recent archaeological studies at Susunia (Sankhyan 2009a,

b) have demonstrated northward movements of the Late Acheulian man, some branches of

which also migrated southeastward to the Bastar region (Sankhyan et al., 2011).

The changed ecology gave way to a ‘short-stocky’ Mode 3 man (Homo narmadensis)

who emerged at around 150 Kya in Narmada valley and possibly colonized the entire

peninsular India throughout the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic. Possibly, the entire South Asia

was colonized by populations of Homo narmadensis which evolved and split to several

similar-sized populations, such as the proto-Australoids and the pygmies. The latter colonized

the Southeast Asia and Andaman Islands, and it is not unlikely that the African Pygmy have

ancestry in Homo narmadensis in Indian heartland.

The genomic evidence supports a model of early divergence of African KhoeSan (the

Bushmen) ancestor from a proto-Pygmy non-Pygmy group about 110 Kya (Veeramah et al.

2011) contending that the KhoiSan were oldest human race followed by the Pygmy. The

latter expanded to the equatorial Africa, and also believed to have migrated very early to the

Southeast Asia, such as New Guinea and Philippines (Aeta), Malaya (Semang), Thailand

(Mani), Andaman archipelago (Jarawa/Ang, Onge, Greater Andamanese and Sentinel), Flores

Island (Rampasasa) and Vanuatu archipelago, when most of these islands were not separated

or were fissured by narrow seas.

Champions of “Out of Africa” hypothesis also speculated early entry of African

‘modern’ Homo sapiens in the later Middle Pleistocene of South Asia carrying Mode 3

technology (James & Petraglia 2005), and so for the early Khoisan (Bushmen) and Pygmy

ancestry in Africa and beyond. If more evidences corroborate then the Homo bamanensis

may turn out to be the possible common ancestor of the KhoeSan and the Pygmy who entered

into the Central Narmada valley around 150 Kya possessing Mode 3 technology? If so,

further evolution of the anatomically modern Homo sapiens is now documented by the recent

humerus about 80 Kya and the "volcanic winter" was not a major hurdle even though it could

have been a great disaster first experienced by the hominins in South Asia (Chesner et al.,

1991; Ambrose, 1998; Oppenheimer, 2002, 2003). Possibly, the eruption of the Toba Mount

in Sumatra- the largest volcanic blast on Earth in the last two million years, had wrapped

India in a 6-inch (15 cm) sheet of volcanic ash leading to a 6-year “Volcanic Winter”. So, it

was the popular “bottle-neck” argument (Ambrose, 1998) to favour African “exodus” as the


146

Indian archaic hominins were arguably considered possessing primitive technology than the

migrating African humans. But, the Narmada archaeological evidence indicates that the

Homo narmadensis was quite innovative and culturally adapted to withstand the “Volcanic

Winter”. The innovation of the bone artifacts was a unique cultural adaptation to facilitate

rapid attainment of anatomical modernity. The ‘short bodied’ humans also had added

advantage of lesser metabolic requirements vis-à-vis the ‘large-bodied’ Acheulian hominins.

While we need to find out more fossil evidences beyond 70 Kya, it is at least clear that

the central India was predominated by the “short-bodied” human populations since about 70

Kya. They may have formed the ancestral substratum of the Andaman-Nicobar pygmies, the

Proto-Australoid /Austric Pauri Bhuya/Munda, including the Australian aboriginal

populations. The mtDNA M31 signatures of >60 Kya found in the Pauri Bhuya/Munda

(Barik et al., 2008; Chandrasekar, 2009) attest the continuity of the “short-bodied”

populations inhabiting the easternmost fringe of the Narmada Valley, and it is also an

interesting revelation that these signatures are shared with the Andaman pygmy, who appear

to have differentiated from the mainland common stock just around 25-30 Kya though their

settlement in the Andaman Islands is not yet known archaeologically beyond 2,200 years BP

(Cooper, 2002). The antiquity of their collateral groups living in the Phillipines, is however

estimated to be 35 Kya (Omoto 1984). According to Bellwood (1978) the Andamanese are

the early Austro-Melanesian settlers of Southeast Asia and Oceania, and not closely related to

the African pygmy populations.

Modern Andamanese are closer to the Asians than to the Africans. The D-loop and

protein-coding data reveal that their phenotypic similarities with the African Pygmies are

likely convergent (Endicott et al., 2003, Thangaraj et al., 2002). This view is also supported

by genomic studies on the Onge by Thangaraj et al. (2005), on the Jarawa by Barik et al.

(2008) and by Chandrasekar et al. (2009) that they possess haplogroup M31 and M 32 shared

with the South-West Asians and Indian mainland Rajbanshi and Pauri Bhuya rather than with

the Africans (Figure 5). A great bio-cultural diversity of India is also in itself an indicator of

her deep prehistory. The totality of evidences—social, cultural, historical, archaeological,

linguistic, phenotypic, epigenetic and genetic—support a conclusion that the Andaman

Islanders have been isolated for a substantial period of time from the African groups. It is

also clear that South Asia was first inhabited for a long time by diverse short-bodied

populations some of which differentiated into the pygmies and the micropygmies, such as the


147

tiny “Hobbits” (Homo floresiensis) (Brown et al., 2004) of Indonesia who occupied the Liang

Bua cave in Flores Island close to the Rampasasa Pygmy. The movement continued down to

the Near Oceania / Sohul (PNG and Australia). This scenario is unlike the previous view that

they bypassed South Asia via southern route to arrive Australia (Lahr and Foley, 1994).

Figure 5: Genomic relationship (in mtDNA M32 haplotype) of the Onge and the Greater

Andamanese Pygmy with the mainland Rajbanshi and Kurumba and their divergence times

The contenders of “Out of Africa” hypothesis argue that anatomical modernity in

South Asia was due to the migrating ‘large-bodied’ African Upper Palaeolithic Homo sapiens

as they had attained early symbolism, complex tool-making behavior and sophisticated social

behaviour in Africa. This view continued due to lack of fossil evidence in South Asia after

the Toba event 75 Kya until very late occupants of the Fa Hien cave of Sri Lanka around 28-

30 Kya (Kennedy & Deraniyagala 1989) and Darri-I-Kur of northeastern Afghanistan (Angel

1972). But, India is geographically and climatically very diverse, and we may not rule out the

possibility of the late survivors of indigenous late Acheulian ‘large-bodied’ men in South

Asia who could achieve anatomical modernity in some pockets. Dambricourt Malassie vide

Chamyal (2011) cites an example of such survivors as late as about 4500 years ago. She

considers that a skull found at Orsang on the western Narmada end in Gujarat in a burial

retains vestiges of the ‘robust features’ of Homo erectus found in the Hathnora calvarium. If

such arguments hold footing, it is quite likely that the descendants of both these ‘large’ and

‘small’ ancient Narmada lineages contributed to the diverse gene pool of South Asia.


148

The Narmada Pleistocene hominins thus would throw open several possibilities and

secrets of human evolution in South and Southeast Asia. It is also because Narmada valley

occupies a strategic mid- place in South Asia as well as between Africa/Europe in the west

and the South-East Asia in the east, and was the major East-West inter-continental link and

passage. The equable climate of Narmada valley, the Central Narmada valley and thousands

of prehistoric rock shelters of the Satpura and Vindhyan hills served the ancient abodes and

centres of artistic activities down through history. I therefore viewed the region as a “paradise

of the Prehistoric man” in South Asia (Sankhyan, 1999a, b, 2005).

REFERENCES

Ambrose SN. 1998. Late Pleistocene human population bottlenecks, volcanic winter, and

differentiation of modern humans. Journal of Human Evolution 34: 623–651.

Angel JL. 1972. A middle Paleolithic temporal bone from Darra-I- kur, Afghanistan. In L. Dupree

(Ed.), Prehistoric research in Afghanistan (1959-1966). Transactions of American Philosophical

Society 62, 54-56.

Athreya S. 2007. Was Homo heidelbergensis in South Asia? A test using the Narmada fossil from

central India. In MD Petraglia, & B Allchin (Eds.), The evolution and history of human populations

in South Asia (pp. 137-170). New York: Springer Press. Doi:10.1007/1-4020-5562-5_7

Barik SS, Sahani R, Prasad BVR, Endicott P, Metspalu M, Sarkar BN, Bhattacharya S, Annapoorna

PCH, Sreenath J, Sun D, Sanchez JJ, Ho SYW, Chandrasekar A and Rao VR. 2008. Detailed

mtDNA Genotypes Permit a Reassessment of the Settlement and Population Structure of the

Andaman Islands. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 138:19-27.

Brown P, Sutikna T, Morwood MJ, Soejono RP, Jatmiko, Wayhu Saptomo E, and Due RA. 2004. A

new small-bodied hominin from the Late Pleistocene of Flores, Indonesia. Nature 431: 1055-1061.

Cameron D, Patnaik R and Sahni A. 2004. The phylogenic significance of the Middle Pleistocene

Narmada hominin cranium from Central India. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 14(6): 419-

447.

Chandersekar C and Rao VR. 2007. Genetic Finger Printing and Peopling of Indian sub-Continent. In

AR Sankhyan & VR Rao (eds.) Human Origins, Genome & People of India: Genomic,

Palaeontological & Archaeological Perspectives, pp. 15-27. Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

Chatterjee BK. 1955. A comparative study of the different body proportions of the Onges of Little

Andamans. The Anthropologist 2 (2): 12-21.

Chandrasekar A. et al. 2009. Updating phylogeny of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup M in

India: dispersal of modern human in South Asian corridor. PLoS ONE 4, 1–13; www.plosone.org


149

Chamyal L, Dambricourt Malassé A, Maurya DM, Raj R, Bandhari S, Pant SK, Gaillard Cl. 2011.

Discovery of a robust Homo sapiens in India (Orsang, Lower Narmada Basin, Gujrat). Possible

continuity with Indian Homo erectus. Acta Anthropologia Sinica 2: 167-191.

Cooper, Z. 2002. Archaeology and History: Early Settlements in the Andaman Islands. London:

Oxford University Press.

Chesner CA, Rose WJ, Drake ADR and Westgate JA. 1991. Eruptive history of earth’s largest

Quaternary Calderas (Toba, Indonesia) clarified. Geology 19: 200-203.

Dambricourt Malassie, A. 2009. Cranial embryogeny and hominin phylogeny. In AR Sankhyan (ed.),

Asian perspectives on human evolution (pp. 103-121). New Delhi: Serials Publications.

Dennell R W and Roebroeks 2005. Out of Africa: An Asian perspective on early human dispersal

from Africa; Nature (London) 438 1099–1104.

Endicott P, Gilbert MT, Stringer C, Lalueza-Fox C, et al. 2003. The genetic origins of the Andaman

Islanders. American Journal of Human Genetics 72: 178-184.

Flower WH. 1880. On the osteology and affinities of the natives of the Andaman Islands. Journal of

Anthropological Institute (London) 9: 10-135.

Gupta P, Basu A and Gupta A. 1960. A study on Onge skeletons from Little Andaman, Part 1 & 2.

Bulletin Department of Anthropology (Government of India) 9 (1–2): 27–40 and 81–106.

Grehan JR and Schwartz JH. 2009. Evolution of the second orangutan: phylogeny and biogeography

of hominid origins. Journal of Biogeography (Special Paper) 1-22. www.blackwellpublishing.com/jbi

< doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02141

James HVA and Petraglia MD. 2005. Modern human origins and the evolution of behavior in the

later Pleistocene record of South Asia. Current Anthropology 46: 3–27.

Kennedy KAR. 2000. God-Apes and Fossil men: The Paleoanthropology of South Asia. Michigan:

The University of Michigan Press.

Kennedy KAR. 2007. The Narmada fossil hominid. In Human Origins, Genome and People of India.

AR Sankhyan and VR Rao (Eds), pp 188-192. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.

Kennedy KAR and Deraniyagala SU. 1989. Fossil remains of 28,000 year old hominids from

Srilanka. Current Anthropology 30: 394-99.

Kennedy KAR, Sonakia A, Chiment J and Verma KK. 1991. Is the Narmada hominin an Indian Homo

erectus? American Journal of Physical Anthropology 86: 475 - 496.

Lahr M and Foley R. 1994. Multiple dispersals and modern origins. Evolutionary Anthropology 3:48-

60.


150

Lee SH and Wolpoff MH. 2007. Herto and the Neandertals: What can a 160,000-year-old African tell

us about European Neandertal evolution? In: AR Sankhyan and VR Rao (eds). Human Origins,

Genome and People of India: Genomic, Palaeontological and Archaeological Perspectives. New

Delhi (India): Allied Publishers. Pp. 329-336.

Lumley MA, Sonakia A. 1985. Premiere Découverte D’un Homo erectus Sur Le Continent Indien a

Hathnora, Dans la Moyenne vallée de la Narmada. L’Anthropologie 89 (1):13–61.

Petraglia MD. 2007. Middle Paleolithic Assemblages from the Indian Subcontinent before and after

the Toba Super-Eruption. Science 317:114-16. www.sciencemag.org

Omoto K. 1984. The Negritos: Genetic origins and microevolution. Acta Anthropogenetica 8: 137-

147.

Oppenheimer C. 2002. Limited global change due to largest known Quaternary eruption, Toba ~74

kyr BP. Quaternary Science Review 21: 1593–1609.

Oppenheimer C. 2003. Ice core and palaeoclimatic evidence for the great volcanic eruption of 1257.

International Journal of Climatology 23: 417–426.

Pearson OM. 2000. Activity, climate and postcranial robusticity: Implications for modern human

origins and scenarios of adaptive change. Current Anthropology 41 (4): 569-605.

Rightmire GP. 1998. Human evolution in the middle Pleistocene: The role of Homo heidelbergensis.

Evolutionary Anthropology 6: 218–227.

Sankhyan AR. 1988. On human ancestry: A new perspective. In Current Anthropological and

Archaeological Perspectives: Vol.-I Man, K.L. Bhowmik (ed), pp. 57-88. New Delhi: Inter-India

Publication.

Sankhyan AR. 1990. A Re-thinking on the ‘Human Great Ape’ Cladogenesis and the Last Common

Ancestor. Journal of the Anthropological Survey of India 39:169-190.

Sankhyan AR. 1997a. Fossil Clavicle of a Middle Pleistocene hominin from the Central Narmada

Valley, India. Journal of Human Evolution 32: 3-16.

Sankhyan AR.1997b. A new human fossil find from the Central Narmada basin and its chronology.

Current Science 73 (12): 1110 – 1111.

Sankhyan AR. 1999a. The place of Narmada hominin in the Jigsaw puzzle of human origins. In

Quaternary of India M.P. Tiwari and D.M. Mohabey eds), Gondvana Geological Magazine Special

Publication, pp. 335-345.

Sankhyan AR. 1999b. Platycleidy and evolution of Homo sapiens with reference to the Narmada

Man. Presented in Anthropology & Archaeology Section, Indian Science Congress January 3 -7,

1999, Chennai.


151

Sankhyan AR. 2005. New fossils of early Stone Age Man from central Narmada Valley. Current

Science 88 (5): 704-707.

Sankhyan AR. 2007. Significance of Human Post-cranial Fossils from Narmada with Remarks on the

Skullcap, In Human Origins, Genome & People of India: Genomic, Palaeontological &

Archaeological Perspectives, AR Sankhyan & VR Rao (eds), pp. 193-217. New Delhi: Allied

Publishers, Pvt. Ltd.

Sankhyan AR. 2009a. On the status of Indian hominoid and hominid fossils, in Status of Prehistoric

Studies in the Twenty-first Century in India, R. Ray & V. Jayaswal (eds), pp.13-23. Proceedings of the

15th UISPP Congress, Lisbon, Portugal, 2006. BAR International Series 1924, Archaeopress, England.

Sankhyan AR. 2009b. Human Bio-Cultural Diversity in Prehistoric-to- Proto-historic India, in R. Ray

& V. Jayaswal (eds) Status of Prehistoric Studies in the Twenty-first Century in India, pp.67-74.

Proceedings of the 15th UISPP Congress, Lisbon, Portugal, 2006, BAR International Series 1924,

Archaeopress, England.

Sankhyan, AR and Rao, VR. 2007. Did ancestors of the Pygmy of Hobbit ever live in Indian

heartland? In Recent advances on Southeast Asian Paleoanthropology and archaeology, Indriati, E.

(ed.), pp.76-89. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University.

Sankhyan AR, Dewangan, LN, Sahoo RH, Chakravarty R and Chatterjee R. 2011. Early prehistoric

signatures of man in Bastar region, Central India. Current Science 101, 1146–1149.

Sankhyan AR., Badam GL, Dewangan LN, Chakraborty S, Prabha S, Kundu S, Chakravarty R.

2012a. New Postcranial Hominin fossils from the Central Narmada Valley, India. Advances in

Anthropology 2 (3), 125-131, Published Online August 2012 in SciRes DOI:10.4236/aa.2012.23015.

Sankhyan AR, Dewangan LN, Chakraborty S, Prabha S, Kundu S, Chakravarty R and Badam GL.

2012b. New human fossils and associated findings from the Central Narmada. Current Science 103

(12): 1461-1469.

Thangaraj K, Singh L, Reddy AG, Rao VR, Sehgal SC, Underhill PA, Pierson M, Frame

IG, Hagelberg E. 2002. Genetic affinities of the Andaman Islanders, a vanishing human population.

Current Biology 13: 86-93.

Thangaraj K, Chaubay G, Kivisild T, Reddy AG, Singh VK, Rasalkar AA, Singh L. 2005.

Reconstructing the origin of Andaman Islanders. Science 309: 996.

Templeton AR. 2012. Gene flow, haplotype patterns and modern human origins, published Online: 15

NOV 2012. DOI: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0020795.pub2

Schwartz JH. 1984. The evolutionary relationships of human and orangutans. Nature 308:501-505.

Schwartz,JH. 1987. The Red Ape. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Sonakia A. 1984. The skull cap of Early Man and associated mammalian fauna from Narmada Valley

Alluvium, Hoshangabad area, M.P. (India). Records Geological Survey of India 113, 159-172.


152

Tiwari MP and Bhai HY. 1997. Quaternary stratigraphy of the Narmada Valley. In Tiwari, MP and

Bhai HY (eds.) Quaternary Geology of the Narmada Valley, pp. 33-63. Geological Survey of India

Special Publication, No. 46.

Veeramah, KR. 2011. An Early Divergence of KhoeSan ancestors from those of Other Modern

Humans is supported by an ABC-Based analysis of Autosomal Resequencing Data. Molecular

Biological Evolution. doi:10.1093/molbev/msr212 Advance Access publication September 1, 2011.

Citation: Sankhyan AR. 2013. The Emergence of Homo sapiens in South Asia: The Central Narmada

Valley as Witness. Hum Bio Rev 2(2): 136-152

Documents

The Emergence of Homo sapiens in South Asia: The Central ...beta.humanbiologyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Volume… · The type specimen of Homo heidelbergensis is Mauer